Talk:Amiga 500

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Amiga (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Amiga (marked as High-importance).


Mmmmm, very fond memories of my Amiga 500. Nice work. -- LukeyBoy

  • Support renaming this article as Amiga 500 in the interest of uniformity. Related articles, such as Amiga 1200 and Amiga 4000, are not abbreviated or concatenated. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 18:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
  • SupportPixel8 12:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - Assuming I'm allowed to say anything in the matter, I say rename it. Fred26 15:52, 5 March 2006 (UTC) :)
  • Support I also suggest to rename this article as Amiga 500 in the interest of uniformity. All the related articles, such as Amiga 500+, Amiga 600, Amiga 1200 and Amiga 4000, are listed this way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Garvanit (talkcontribs).
  • Support strongly. The Amiga 500 is simply not referred to as "the A500" anywhere I've ever seen. Look at the incoming links: the majority link to the Amiga 500 redirect. Rename A500 to Amiga 500 asap. Haakon 20:57, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Move completed. Naconkantari e|t||c|m 21:03, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Naconkantari. Haakon 21:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

A500 release date[edit]

Does anyone have any (US based) articles from March to July 1987 about the A500? I have looked through the google groups archive from Jan to July '87, but it doesn't make any specific mention of a release date. The impression I get from the archive is around June. —Pixel8 14:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


It looks like a PC owner wrote the summary. Amigas have had an interrupt system called "IRQs". This is IBM PC and compatibles terminology. Likewise, why mention that there's no Port-mapped I/O? As this is purely an Intel/Zilog phenomenon, why say it? It would be like saying there was no segmented memory or 640KB memory limit - these things are purely IBM PC topics and the fact they're not on other computers is indicative of the other computers not being IBM PCs. Should I say that the Amiga 500 doesn't contain pork because it's not a pork sausage?

PC-users may be limited in their view of computer architecture :-) Electron9 (talk) 23:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

A600/A1200 and PC/Macs[edit]

In Release section, "neither the A1200 nor the A600 replicated the commercial success of its predecessor as, by this time, the market was definitively shifting from the home computer platforms of the past to commodity Wintel PCs and the new "low-cost" Macintosh Classic, LC and IIsi models", I added tag [citation needed]. I dont dispute its message but wording is historically inaccurate. In 1992-1995 MS-DOS was still prominent on PCs (so, why Wintel PC?) and I dont recall Macs were competing against Amiga 500 at all since Amiga (500) was mostly a gaming machine. And what about consoles? Amiga and Amiga 500 was losing the market but better sources could be used. Xorxos (talk) 21:18, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Rock Lobster??[edit]

This article claims that it is commonly known as "Rock Lobster" in the lead, but it doesn't mention it anywhere in the body or cite the claim. Can anyone cite the claim or shall I delete it? Chrisrus (talk) 17:59, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

"B52/ROCK LOBSTER" is literally printed on the board. Zac67 (talk) 19:54, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Maybe so, but this picture you've provided doesn't seem to show it. Chrisrus (talk) 22:14, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Erm - have you looked at the bottom right edge of the board just below the FDD? Zac67 (talk) 06:22, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I see it now. And this picture proves that it "is commonly known as" that? Chrisrus (talk) 06:27, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
The article just states "also known as" which the picture doesn't exactly prove but printing on the board pretty much suggests the code name's no secret. Zac67 (talk) 20:04, 16 August 2012 (UTC)